-Removed-I have looked back through all my posts in this thread and I see no sign of 'palpable contempt' for anyone. I did suggest that you might be getting 'over excited' by current events and I have since explained why I believe those who claim current events are extraordinary are succumbing to an illusion. It had nothing to do with you having a 'spiritual leaning', I am sure there are atheists who make the same error - in fact I myself have in the past.
So I can only conclude that you are talking about my behavior in other threads?
The tendency to over emphasize current events does seem to be increase when someone wants to interpret prophesy as pointing to the current time. If you look back at records of people trying to interpret prophesy, the vast majority of them interpret the prophesy as pointing to the time they live in or very soon after. Almost nobody says "OK that prophesy refers to the events of last century".
1 edit
-Removed-If our leaders don't get a handle on the unrest, our world is about to change into
something quite ugly.
Kelly
I was thinking of Matthew 24
6 And ye shall hear of wars and rumors of wars; see that ye be not troubled: for these things must needs come to pass; but the end is not yet.
7 For nation shall rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom; and there shall be famines and earthquakes in divers places.
8 But all these things are the beginning of travail.
9 Then shall they deliver you up unto tribulation, and shall kill you: and ye shall be hated of all the nations for my name's sake.
10 And then shall many stumble, and shall deliver up one another, and shall hate one another.
11 And many false prophets shall arise, and shall lead many astray.
12 And because iniquity shall be multiplied, the love of the many shall wax cold.
13 But he that endureth to the end, the same shall be saved.
-Removed-I think you need to seriously think about that comment of yours. Do you leave open the possibility that Father Christmas or the Easter Rabbit are real? Do you even consider the possibility that Nostradamus was on to something? If you really don't believe something, then you don't, and I really cant see how you interpret that as 'putting limitations on yourself', unless you are suggesting that we believe everything - and therefore nothing, as for every possible fact there is another conflicting one that can't co-exist.
There simply aren't enough reasons for me to even consider that prophesy in Daniel is genuine prophesy. In fact there aren't enough reasons for me to even consider that any prophesy is genuine. If I came across some really convincing prophesy, I might change my views, but then it would open a whole host of questions about how the universe works, and would contradict much of what I believe to be true, so it would have to be very very convincing.
2 edits
-Removed-Comparing a person's belief in thier God to the easter rabbit is a somewhat overly dismissive mindset and an invalid test. Most of the human race believes in a supernatuaral deity of some sort, but very few believe in the easter rabbit; as a person of logic I would have thought you would have seen this is therfore not a good 'test by comparison'.
That's a poor defence. No person is capable of reliably establishing that any supernatural entity is any more plausible than another. More importantly, it is a ~2000 year head start, coupled with the crusades, inquisition, etc... along with herd mentality and indoctrination which puts your religion in the position that it has a such a higher number of subscribers than the easter bunny. This numerical advantage however has zero weight when it comes to assessing which supernatural fairy-tale entity is more plausible - indeed if it was a valid metric then by spending time in some middle eastern country one would expect you to acknowledge the majority of people there subscribe to Islam, and consequently - renounce your faith in Christianity. Or perhaps you'd acknowledge the majority of people do not subscribe to *any* particular religion, and so use this to justify your divorce from organised religion entirely.
1 edit
-Removed-But the majority view, when one considers how long Christianity has had to spread it's word so to enjoy this advantage along with some dubious methods of getting new converts carries little weight. Herd mentality plays a massive part also.
For example recall your school days and suppose some teacher submitted a question to the class with two answers A or B - he asks if the class think A is true and most of them raise their hand; the fact that you might have good reason for thinking B is true is vastly overshadowed by the fact that all eyes will be upon you should you display your support for B.
The same can be true for Christianity - if everyone you know thinks Bible-God is true then you'd look damned silly for thinking some other god is true. This in itself though does not lend any weight to the truth or falsity of the Christian god. As such, a different argument is required to shoot down the easter bunny comparison.
7 edits
-Removed-Sorry, I adjusted my post because I noticed I was saying the same thing over again - and this is poor form on my part (unfortunately I realised this too late).
Basically my contention is that you wrote:
"Comparing a person's belief in thier God to the easter rabbit is a somewhat overly dismissive mindset and an invalid test. Most of the human race believes in a supernatuaral deity of some sort, but very few believe in the easter rabbit; as a person of logic I would have thought you would have seen this is therfore not a good 'test by comparison'."
and I challenge strongly the notion that a numbers argument is even admissible in this setting. A logical person should not consider the numbers argument valid unless the greater numbers possessed some qualities, attributes, or demonstrable insight which qualified their view on this subject. This is not the case with religious adherence. My appeal to social conformity was an attempt, in part, to account for this phenomenon of mass adherence to your religion.
For you second paragraph - that is true(apart from moving goal posts - I believe I've been consistent with my argument...perhaps I have failed to show this); but I don't see what it takes away from my main argument here.
To simply conform to the majority view for no reason than it is the majority, is an inherently unstable strategy given that one tends to move into areas with a different majority view from time t o time.
1 edit
-Removed-You misunderstood me. I said nothing about what you - a believer - should do with regards to your God. I was pointing out that I have as little belief that your God (or any god) exists as you have with regards to the Easter Bunny. I think it is therefore a perfectly good 'test by comparison'. I fail to see why other peoples opinions (with regard to belief in God) have any bearing on the matter. The issue is solely - if I truly don't believe something, why do you see that as putting limitations on myself.
My comment was not asking you to specifically consider the prophesy in Daniel, it was meant to ask you to consider (in the light of Einstein’s statement especially) that there could be more to the cosmos that science has so far determined and more to humanity than has been mapped in our DNA.
I am sure there is more. However, I am equally sure that that 'more' does not include the Easter Bunny nor prophesy. You rule out the Easter Bunny but cant understand me ruling out prophesy.